SC - Should development be split between sites or located on one site?
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 17348
Received: 20/03/2010
Respondent: Mr Ron Sadler
No development should be considered that impacts on greenbelt, woodland or Agricultural land.
No development should be considered that impacts on greenbelt, woodland or Agricultural land.
Comment
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 17801
Received: 07/04/2010
Respondent: Mrs Joanna Gibson
The best sites are those which present the least negative impact on the surrounding residents in terms of views, quality of life etc. Accordingly, the decision between one or more sites should be based on the site which least affects the residents of Canewdon. Social cohesion would definitely be negatively affected if current resident's lost the scenic views from their homes and their quality of life was to decrease which a densely populated area could bring. SC1, SC3, & SC4 would all upset the community with loss of views overlooking Southend/ Rochford.
The best sites are those which present the least negative impact on the surrounding residents in terms of views, quality of life etc. Accordingly, the decision between one or more sites should be based on the site which least affects the residents of Canewdon. Social cohesion would definitely be negatively affected if current resident's lost the scenic views from their homes and their quality of life was to decrease which a densely populated area could bring. SC1, SC3, & SC4 would all upset the community with loss of views overlooking Southend/ Rochford.
Comment
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 18646
Received: 27/04/2010
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Byford
Insufficient options available to provide much comment. Would like to think that smaller scale development split across a few sites would be better as could provide variety and may not have such a great impact on surroundings. BUT- not at the expense of loss of agricultural land around the obvious boundaries of the village. Further sites would also have to be put forward for consideration from other parts of Canewdon.
Insufficient options available to provide much comment. Would like to think that smaller scale development split across a few sites would be better as could provide variety and may not have such a great impact on surroundings. BUT- not at the expense of loss of agricultural land around the obvious boundaries of the village. Further sites would also have to be put forward for consideration from other parts of Canewdon.
Object
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 19681
Received: 29/04/2010
Respondent: mrs mary wren
To increase the housing in this area will require the roads to be upgraded as they are at their best rural at their worst damaged and dangerous.
It would also require the telephone lines to be upgraded as they are I believe running at full capacity and most people can not get good speeds for internet connections.
It would also require investment into the public transport system as this is patchy and at rush hour times useless!!
To increase the housing in this area will require the roads to be upgraded as they are at their best rural at their worst damaged and dangerous.
It would also require the telephone lines to be upgraded as they are I believe running at full capacity and most people can not get good speeds for internet connections.
It would also require investment into the public transport system as this is patchy and at rush hour times useless!!
Comment
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 24113
Received: 26/04/2010
Respondent: MRS SALLY COTTISS
Located on one site
Houses/bungalows - no bigger than 2 or 3 beds (I would hate to see flats built).
Obviously more houses means more people which would mean better sewerage/paths/school extended more amenities needed.
I would have thought the best site for the proposed houses would be on the same field as SC1 but turned round the other way. This way you wouldn't spoil so many peoples views and you would sort of join up Scotts Hall Cottages which are stuck out on their own. But obviously you would need paths, and improved sewerage, extended, and possibly more amenities with 60 more houses.
Comment
Allocations DPD Discussion and Consultation Document
Representation ID: 24117
Received: 26/04/2010
Respondent: Mrs G Delve
Located on only one site
A mixture of flats, houses and bungalows.
Preference - SC3
Located on only one site
A mixture of flats, houses and bungalows.